@kraal42 No it’s not, lol… Wind turbine fails, you get a broken wind
turbine and some debris. Nuclear plant fails, you get toxic poisonous
clouds, countless deaths and whole areas of uninhabitable land for
thousands of years.
Think again.﻿

@C Pt.2 New Orleans was largely evacuated- Southern California will
unfortunately not have time. Where do you relocate that many
people,anyway? I know many people play Russian Roulette with time and
scoff&mock about disasters… but that’s only till they happen. Not
worrying about these things and recklessly not caring are two very
different things. If you prepare, you don’t need to worry. If you don’t,
you’ll regret it. Don’t hold your breath waiting for help- especially from
FEMA.

@jetpoweredgriffin Well, all I can say is I enjoyed it because you’re a
lefty that actually doesn’t use the “F” word and it’s always nice to play
“Real Hardball” with a leftist without that word. Take care.

A commercial reactor is generally built by a company for the purpose of
generating electricity for sale. They are also built to high standards
which include containment structures. The Chernobyl reactors were built by
the Soviet government to a much lower standard and had no containment
buildings. The reactors were used to make plutonium for nuclear weapons and
to produce electricity.

@quinnweller Hi, I was joking to make a point about the potential
differences at a macro level, in terms of impact from currently popular
methods of energy generation vs. windmills. Thanks for your response.

This doesn’t prove that anything is wrong with wind power, anyone with
common sense would realize there was something wrong with it and to move
away. Plus wind turbines aren’t in very populated areas. I see alot of
people commenting saying “This proves nuclear power is better” well how
about you count the number of deaths and birth defects it caused? Every
energy source has its drawbacks. One wind turbine exploding because the
wind was WAAAY to strong proves nothing.